<HTML><HEAD></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">CM wrote:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">> Finally, “nevuah” is firmly rooted in
commands of the Torah, and is<BR>> not to be seen as an attempt to add HV”S
to the Torah. It is a command<BR>> to believe and obey the commands of a navi
– not to create a Torah<BR>> chadasha. They can only be of a temporary nature
and not a new mitzvo<BR>> ledoros (unless of course it is as takonos) and
valid even if they<BR>> temporarily countermand an express command of the
Torah – but clearly<BR>> based on the Torah as given
miSinai.<BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">RZS responded:<BR>That is all in the realm of
halacha. But most nevuah has nothing to do<BR>with halacha. And most nevuah is
decidedly new, and it is Torah. So<BR>there's nothing radical in the idea of
"progressive revelation". All<BR>"vezot hatorah" means is that new revelations
can't directly change the<BR>halacha.</FONT><BR><BR>CS asks:</DIV>
<DIV>So just which “<FONT face="Times New Roman">nevuah is decidedly new” and
unknown or not revealed to Moshe Rabbeinu? Is it the ma’assei merkovo (but ma
sheroaso shifcha al hayam ...) or the nevuas Yeshai’ahu on Gog uMogog or kibbutz
Golios etc. Just what would you point to as decicedly new and unknown to MR or
that adds new revelations unknown to MR the av hanevi’im? Don’t give me a
generality, but point to a specific nevuah in Nach of the type of which you
speak and also tell me how you know MR did not know it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Kol tuv</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Chaim Manaster</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>